So wallowing in cash is the reason why we'll be like City? As a club, we've always had money. Even before the Glazers. So that doesn't count.
Qatar or Ineos - which owners would you prefer? | Vote now Private
- Thread starter Zlatattack
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So wallowing in cash is the reason why we'll be like City? As a club, we've always had money. Even before the Glazers. So that doesn't count.
In this case it's not just state backing, it's it's state backing from an absolute monarchy dictatorship with a bad human rights record and the 2nd worst CO2-footprint per capita in the world. How is that not a bad thing?
His father was the emir, no longer and his father has individual wealth too. Are you saying that none of the royal family have individual wealth?
So Inoes have 5bn in cash reserves to pay the fee is it?
No, having exactly the same kind of owner conferring exactly the same kind of benefits most people around here have called "cheating" and being happy about it is why we'll be like City. But maybe you could explain to me what exactly, given Qatari ownership, we could legitimately bitch about concerning City that would not also apply to us?
It’s social media. It’s not reality. Real Madrid have been doing what you speak of for years and it brought them 9 years of no Champions League. Football is not that simple. Yes it might mean we have a summer where we can buy Harry Kane and Frenkie De Jong. But so what we’ve been doing that for years anyway. If anything we’ve had 10 years of handicapping. Through that being rubbish managers and a crap CEO.
Those things can still continue under Qatar ownership (A bit of light at the end of the tunnel for you) we will just have nicer facilities to show for it.
I’ve never seen a fan base so spoilt who want fake struggle. We are like famous rappers who want to be gangsters repping Blood or crip.
That can't be a serious question? Think about why these states fund these institutions. It's clearly something a state shouldn't be involved in.
Ohhh okay. That makes sense.
Lets be elitists. Because the West have polluted the air to get to where they are, no other country is allowed. How do you think UK and America got to this point? Was it 0 net carbon ? The UK / USA have never had human rights issue? No slavery?
So when a country is changing, we shouldn't allow that?
So you are saying backing from a country of such accusations is bad, but backing from Goldman sachs who have been accused of sexist, genderist, fraud is fine?
So, City have cheated by cooking the books. Which we know they need to do, to spend.
But we've consistently earning money. Been top 3 earners in world football, even despite the fact that the Glazers have saddled us with massive debts and take out payments.
So why would Jassim need to cook the books, when we earn plentyful?
Sure, no one's perfect so everything's the same. Not a lot of people take that kind of reasoning seriously.
So because one middle eastern owner cooked the books it means they all will? Because its the “same type of owner”?
So, if Jassim didn't cook the books, no United fan would have had any remaining complaint? Everything else, we've been just fine with? And if people think we don't need the money, why is the forum full of posts anticipating the arrival of Mbappe and spending sprees to come? And why is 63% supporting Qatari ownership? Because they're such lovely people, and the former crown prince has a proven record running a top football club?
The answer is obvious: The Qatari bid gets support because people thinks it will put us on the same footing as City and PSG. Which is fair enough. But we can't have it both ways.
Oh, and City just delivered a better financial result than we did.
That remains a possibility, yes. Also worth remembering that this is not necessarily a sale - the Glazers have invited offers for minority stakes and full takeovers as part of this process. Everyone has focussed on the sale, because that is the outcome most fans favour. We don't have a clear idea of what the Glazers' preference is, though (it has been reported that the family are themselves split on the best way to proceed).
They made a lot on bog roll due to the pandemic.
I'm really not an expert on this, but this information is available for anyone who cares to spend 1 minute to check. Jassim Al Thani's father was the former Emir (Dictator) of Qatar, and Jassim himself was the crown prince of Qatar before giving his claim to the throne to his younger brother Tamim, who is the Emir of Qatar today. He is part of the royal familiy ruling in Qatar, they are the state of Qatar and all their money comes from ruling Qatar. I guess they will try to convince UEFA it isn't statefunded, but I think they will have a hard time doing that, so my guess is they will try to lobby their way to getting UEFA to accept that clubs with the same owners isn't banned from European competitions out of fear of collaboration.
The state of this post.
You continue to do you, mate.
Cheers!
No, those figures (by which I mean Deloittes report on revenue) are for 2021-22 - post-pandemic.
I just meant you'll probably get that kind of answer and it seems he didnt disappoint.
Oh yes ofcourse, your moral compass stops when its something you dont like.
Quite surprised by the strong support for a Qatari bid on here - is this just a transfer muppet thing? Or is it worries about INEOS?
Goes against the other poll which shows the majority here (including me) have reservations about a Qatari bid plus all the huge negativity (although much of it unfounded in the end) in the World Cup Forum
I also note The Atheltic did a poll which gave 66% support to Ratcliffe so seems this is a RedCafe thing
Goes against the other poll which shows the majority here (including me) have reservations about a Qatari bid plus all the huge negativity (although much of it unfounded in the end) in the World Cup Forum
I also note The Atheltic did a poll which gave 66% support to Ratcliffe so seems this is a RedCafe thing
Funny how our fanbase has trashed the likes of Man City, PSG and Newcastle over the years for their sportswashing, and here we are with 63% of our fanbase wanting the exact same for our club. Some might call that hypocrisy.
I think a dictatorship state with a bad human rights record and environmental record is worse than Goldman sachs, yes. A lot worse.
Happy?
Have good day!
For what its worth I don't think that Sheikh Jassim being a private investor makes him all that better because it looks like a similar model to russian oligarchs which to me isn't something that I would like. The personal appropriation of sovereign funds isn't exactly a good thing.
And yes, I'm speculating based on the Panama Papers links.
And yes, I'm speculating based on the Panama Papers links.
If you really think City brought in more money than us, then I now understand why you think we need to cook the books.
But, I for onw, and many others, know that City didn't outperform us in terms of genuine revenue. City have been accused of this many times. And got off with it by a technicality in the European court of law.
I supprt the Qatar bid because it sounds the best financial bid. Jassim would clear all debts and would invest into the redevelopment of the stadium and training facilities.
He would delist us from the stock exchange, and we wouldn't have to worry about paying out dividends. He would plough back in any revenue made by us.
This would allow us to spend all the money we earn back into the cub, and could spend what we genuinely earn.
We have thw status and history ro be earning the big money we have. We have the commercial pull. Our stadium is full every week. We are one of the 3, if not the, biggest club in the world.
City had/has none of the above. They had to cook the books to be able to spend like we can. To try and be as big as us. There's a reason why people call their stadium Emptihad. Pep has had to on occasion beg for people to come and watch them play. City have had to pump crowd noise into their stadium, to even make it sound loud.
To compare us to City is a joke. To have to explain the differences, to one Manchester United supporter to another, astounds me.
No. A lot of fans want Qatar.
At least he's got one. And he's prepared to use it, which in the real world means making distinctions. You apparently think that's too complicated, and prefer to just throw the compass out instead. That must be very convenient.
Oh yes because the environmental record of a big petroleum company INEOS is very green right?
The thing is, our fanbase is so huge that both The Athletic poll and the the one in this thread is covering such a tiny sample size.
Only a 1000 people have voted in this thread - it's nothing.
Old legacy one too, the newer ones are much harder to detect.
So, we need the money, but also we don't really? We don't need the money, but the Qataris are preferable because they're the best financial solution? We're a commercial powerhouse, it's just that we need someone to foot the bill for downpaying our debt and investing in new facilities. Because.....we can't really afford to do that on our own revenues? So, maybe we need the money? You know, the extra money, beyond our own revenue streams?
Doesn't quite seem to add up, and also seemed to have touched a nerve there. Get used to it mate, because this is what we're going to hear from all around if we're enthusiastically cheering in new mideast oil money ownership. And frankly with good reason.
As for revenue, see for yourself. Premier League clubs dominate Deloitte’s latest Football Money League report - The Athletic You could just assume it's all due to cheating and not real at all, but that would probably be a tad simplistic.
Why would I need an example from their ownership of PSG when you can already see an effect right here, on RedCafe? How many posters would show the same support of Qatar had it been Liverpool they were buying? Why did so many Geordies suddenly support Saudi Arabia?
No worse than the 'moral crusaders' vilifying anyone who disagrees with them.
Think you are getting the family members a bit mixed up. Are you talking about HBJ here? Because the Sheikh Jassim bidding for United is not the current Emir's brother, neither was his father (HBJ) at any point the Emir. It's understandable to get it mixed up due to the similarities in names and sheer number of family members but they are not as close as you make out (although they have direct connections) family-wise. Unlike PSG, who is owned by a subsidiary of the sovereign wealth fund, both UEFA and Premier League would have hard time proving that it's state-funded apart from the argument that "everybody knows".
Polls on Twitter have shown massive support (80%+) in favour of the Qatari bid. In contrast, the polling done by The Athletic and the United We Stand fanzine had the Ratcliffe/Ineos bid with a clear majority of the support.
As always, it's a mixed bag and United fans are of course not a homogenous group - the results will vary wildly depending on which constituency you're asking.
So how is the idea of fans supporting a Qatar bid equivalent to Qatar using football to push their agenda? Fans can support a middle eastern bid purely based on what they have promised to do...and so far, they have promised to do things right, and they have done things right in similar clubs like PSG. Every single scary thing you think they will do goes against the evidence of how they have run their other European businesses
You think PSG is a good example of how a top football club should be run?
Very helpful, but typical of the 'moral crusader' element.
I don't know if a top football club should be run in any specific way but PSG haven't been run in a different way to the other top football clubs.
When did I say we don't need the money? We need it to clear our debts. Jassim is the only bidder so far who has said that the debts would be cleared.
And exactly correct, we need someone to clear our debts.
And yes, it is simple, they have cooked the books. That is why the PL have put 100+ charges against them.
City were/are a nothing club before Abu Dhabi came along. We were/are one of the biggest sports institutions before the Glazers came, and we will still continue to be so under any new owner.
Like they have on PSG you mean?
That's a rather nasty anti-Muslim post there, thought a mod would be better than that.
I'm very much against a Qatari takeover myself and it would conflict with my values to a degree that I will probably stop supporting the club if it comes to that. There's no secret I was hoping more United fans would share my stands in this.
That said, it's hard not to recognize that the redcafe-fans are a lot more diverse than the subscribers of the Athletic. We have a global presence, with people from all layers of every society out there in here, and I think that's why some of us many times get's shocked by how different view one can have on different takes on the world. Although I might come across as a highhorse moralist in this thread and other threads about sportswashing and dictatorships owning sporting enterprises, I enjoy and appreciate the debates on here, even when my view doesn't seem win through.
Cheers!